Snow Job Revisited
Is the world, or at least those populations that seem to matter, convinced of climate change or more appropriately its scientific name “Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming” (CAGW)? To answer the question let us first contemplate the oft-used response, “The science is settled”. Reflecting on that, then why are trillions and trillions of dollars being spent in an attempt to further prove the theory? Thus it is obviously not scientifically settled or systematically established so the war continues.
A quote relative to the ongoing conflict can be attributed to Aeschylus an early Greek tragedian who said, “In war, truth is the first casualty.” The great dilemma for many is that truth is measured, not by honesty, accuracy, or certainty, but by who does the speaking.
As an example, if Hillary Clinton said, she was opposed to the international issue of free trade, her position would be devotedly respected by the vast majority of liberals or progressives while being loathed by the bulk of conservatives. If Donald Trump said he was opposed to free trade, the sentiment would be the exact reverse. Yet, they both oppose free trade. Or at least, claim to.
When a matter is elevated to a level of distinction and prominence becoming a contentious political issue it is no longer a topic simply relegated to its initial classification or category – it becomes a proverbial ‘hot button’ issue. As it develops, and competing political parties take sides, there is often little room for veraciousness - truth, accuracy, or honesty in content.
In the woke society, opposition to a leftist issue and then seeking forgiveness can no longer be an action leading to any clemency. If someone is critical, even one time, of an issue supported and promoted by the left, there is no leniency or mercy, merely castigation ending in abandonment by way of cancel culture. Anthropogenic climate change has been elevated from a solely political issue to a woke leftist issue, so no activist, advocate cientist will now ever deny its authenticity, irrespective of adversarial research or fictitious findings.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., now running on the 2024 Democratic presidential nomination ticket, claims to have changed his mind on climate change, calling it an act by the government and rich corporations and businessmen to intentionally establish “totalitarian controls on society. In the linked article from the Daily Caller and a video by American radio hostess and journalist Kim Iversen, Kennedy says “Climate issues and pollution issues are being exploited by, you know, the World Economic Forum and Bill Gates and all of these big, you know, mega-billionaires, the same way that COVID was exploited, to use it as an excuse to clamp down top-down totalitarian controls on society.”
Well, you need only check back to my article, “A Snow Job” of November 22, 2004, where I show that Kennedy wrote an LA Times editorial in 2008 citing that climate change will eliminate any further snows in McLean, Virginia where he and his famous family once skied and tobogganed. In the Daily Caller article, he deceptively claims to have always been a skeptic, however, it would appear that is not the case. Is the “zebra doesn't change its stripes” the reality of Kennedy’s conduct or misconduct, or did he truly change his mind? He definitely needs to admit the motivation for the change - even though he spoke the truth in his radio interview with Iversen.
The discovery of this LA Times article with a story in the Washington Times exhibits what deceitful politicians will call “misspeak” and can be expected as an advertisement or debate against Kennedy in progressive political challenges. However, I believe Kennedy acknowledges that the public conviction in climate change is beginning to wane, especially among the more mature populations that traditionally vote and understand the harsh perils and pitfalls of socialism.
